The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is a favorable condition that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime, and that the victim obtained considerable benefits through continuous transactions with the defendant, taking into account the fact that the victim appears to have lent money to the defendant.

However, under the circumstance that the Defendant was unable to repay approximately KRW 160,000,000,000, which was first borrowed from the injured party, the Defendant borrowed money from the victim and acquired the money by deceiving the victim, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the amount of damage is not at least KRW 30,000,000, but is not completely recovered from the damage (the Defendant repaid KRW 17,000 to the victim on February 11, 2009).

In light of the above financial transaction details, according to the above financial transaction details, only the fact that KB National Bank's 17,308,50 won was withdrawn at the same time as KB National Bank's dong Daegu branch, and there is no evidence as to whether the withdrawn amount was paid to the victim and whether it was paid as the repayment of the borrowed amount in this case), the victim's evaluation of punishment is strong, and the court below made a sentence within the scope of recommended punishment [type 1 (less than KRW 100,000) under the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court regarding the crime in this case] under the sentencing guidelines of the defendant taking into account favorable circumstances for the defendant. The court below held a sentence within the scope of recommended punishment [type 1 (less than KRW 100,00) under the general fraud type of the fraud type of the crime in this case), since there is no special change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing at the trial of the defendant, and considering the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive of the crime in this case, means and result after the crime.

3. The Defendant’s appeal is without merit and thus, Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.